To be funding it hard to bite my tongue re weaning

(117 Posts)
HugeFloweryPants Wed 20-Mar-13 22:43:39

I accepted a long time ago that a friend and I parent differently and am quite happy with that, horses for courses. I breastfeed and go with the flow and she's a routine queen with 4 hour bottles etc. BUT I'm finding it hard to bite my tongue now we're on our second babies regarding weaning, she's well informed/ educated but has a big baby that 'needs' early weaning...but it's taken to extremes...
7/8 weeks baby rice
8 weeks rusks at bed time (trying to keep 4 hrs between bottles)
now 10 weeks
morning: eg porridge powder stuff
dinner: eg powdered meal by heinz (not seen but described)
tea: rusk

...and today exclaiming he's dropped a few centiles

I know I lentil weave a tad...but give me perspecrive, surely this is outside the norm and not a good idea? Mine would have been unfeedable then due to tongue thrusting.Or am I just not used to this as I've never bought ready made baby food?

YouTheCat Wed 20-Mar-13 22:46:13

Unless she's been advised to do it by a medical professional, YANBU to have trouble biting your tongue.

However, it's her baby so probably best not to say anything really.

WorraLiberty Wed 20-Mar-13 22:46:39

You said "she's well informed/ educated"

So yes, bite your's her child and her decision.

My eldest is 21yrs old and I fed him baby rice at 6wks as advised by my GP and HV at the time.

Guidelines have changed due to research but if she's well informed and educated and still chooses to do it the old fashioned way, why would you need to say anything to her?

YAB a bit U. I used to feel like this about friend's parenting choices, but now our kids are older it's all faded into total insignificance and I'm glad I didn't strain good friendships by sticking my beak in.

IneedAsockamnesty Wed 20-Mar-13 22:49:29

She may be educated but she is not well informed. But if you say anything she won't actually admit that.

HugeFloweryPants Wed 20-Mar-13 22:53:21

I don't comment, well once I suggested even though she planned to bottle feed she could give colstrum in case she didn't know why....I learnt and shut up!
I know it WAS the norm...but full 3 meals even?

babanouche Wed 20-Mar-13 22:57:44

I'd find it hard to bite my tongue in this instance. Being that it seems completely fucking mental.

WorraLiberty Wed 20-Mar-13 22:59:02

Is the baby happy? Is she happy?

YANBU to silently judge but do remember to keep it silent.

As mrsminiverscharlady rightly says, these things tend to fade into total significance as they grow up.

And every stage they go through, there's new potential for you both to silently judge about each other.

WorraLiberty Wed 20-Mar-13 22:59:21

*insignificance blush

IneedAsockamnesty Wed 20-Mar-13 23:00:02

3 full meals at 10 weeks old certainly was not the norm after 1992

YouTheCat Wed 20-Mar-13 23:00:37

On my calendar for March is a ginger cat wearing a hat and dark glasses, underneath it says 'I am silently judging you' - so what Worral said really.

maddening Wed 20-Mar-13 23:04:30

The thing is - if he drops too many centiles then he will be referred to gp - so if it is a concern then she will have the advice of a health care professional.

Pobblewhohasnotoes Wed 20-Mar-13 23:06:32

Bigger babies don't need weaning early and I can't believe anyone would think its a good idea to give baby rice that early. She's totally misinformed. Why not point out the guidelines of weaning to her? Her poor baby, if it ends up with gut problems it'll be her own fault.

LandofTute Wed 20-Mar-13 23:06:41

Why do people do that four hourly feed thing? I've never understood it. Won't they be more likely to sleep well at night if you feed more often?

CheshireDing Wed 20-Mar-13 23:07:14

YANBU. I am a bit of a tree hugger type too smile

I reckon if you like her as a friend though you will probably just have to ignore it. If she is worried about his weight have you suggested she keep a note of his meals and discuss it with the GP and see what they think re his weight, phrased a certain way obviously !

Pobblewhohasnotoes Wed 20-Mar-13 23:08:48

All the baby needs is milk. Why are people shocked that babies wake up overnight? It's what they do! And I'm sorry but it's what you sign up for when you become a parent.

Also, why are people in such a frigging rush to wean? Weaning is a faff!! Stop rushing your baby to grow it.

NaturalBaby Wed 20-Mar-13 23:09:00

She can't be that well informed if she's feeding her baby rice and porridge at 10 weeks.

Seenenoughtoknow Wed 20-Mar-13 23:10:12

The very latest advice in our area from our HV is that weaning at all before 6 months can cause various stomach, bowel and food intolerance problems in later life. Apparently a LOT of research has been done on this...our HV is really clued up on the subject. I think your friend isn't quite as wise as she thinks she is.

LandofTute Wed 20-Mar-13 23:18:51

Who is shocked that babies wake in the night?

Pobblewhohasnotoes Wed 20-Mar-13 23:22:19

One of the reasons that people start feeding their very young babies baby rice is to try and make them fill up they don't wake up overnight.

LadyBeagleEyes Wed 20-Mar-13 23:26:32

It's absolutely none of your business OP.

Shellywelly1973 Thu 21-Mar-13 00:14:49

Its none of your business.

Its hard when you really disagree with a friends choices but sometimes Thats the way it is.

My best friend of 20years had a baby last year. She was feeding him food at 3 months. I didn't agree. But she didn't ask my opinion, so i didn't offer or give it.

MortifiedAdams Thu 21-Mar-13 00:20:30

Im no lentil weaver and dd was on a three hourly daytime / four hourly nighttime schedule (that I didnt have to force her into - I wouldnt have done that), but I held off foods until.six months.

I.know a lot of.people still start to wean at 17weeks, and whilst its not my choice and I disagree with it, I dont ever say anything as "their baby, their way". Weaning at seven eight nine weeks is mental.

Their poor digestive systems. Having a SIL who was weaned early and is now being fitted at 22years old with a permanent colostomy bag, I sincerely hope that her LO does.not suffer any long term damage.

LittleBunnyFeileFooFoo Thu 21-Mar-13 00:21:18

I was raised exactly like this, according to my very disapproving of me ebfing my ds DM. Baby will be fine as long as weight is being monitored.

AThingInYourLife Thu 21-Mar-13 00:23:47

Is rice flour more filling than milk?

Isn't milk lovely and fatty?

Or am I thinking of seals?

WafflyVersatile Thu 21-Mar-13 02:01:29

seals are lovely and fatty.

hufflepup Thu 21-Mar-13 02:35:56

mmmmmm, seals.......

Judge away- clearly bonkers but I wouldn't say anything.

PurplePidjin Thu 21-Mar-13 04:02:54

It's none of your business.

And very very sad for the poor baby sad <judgy wedgie>

AThingInYourLife Thu 21-Mar-13 07:33:10

That's all very well, but you can create a severe seal allergy if you introduce it into a virgin gut.

Moominlandmidwinter Thu 21-Mar-13 09:01:21

Yanbu. This makes me feel judgy too, but I never say anything to the person in question. Somebody I know recently posted on FB how their 'lil soldier' was now a big boy, because he was having rusks at 10 weeks. Somebody else a few months ago kept posting about giving their baby solids from 7 weeks, a couple of months later was posting about their baby's hospital appointment for severe eczema hmm.

TheRealFellatio Thu 21-Mar-13 09:05:55

I started weaning all of my children at around that age, I was weaned at around that age, and probably you and most people over the age of 20 on this forum were too. It may not be what HCPs recommend now but honestly it is highly unlikely to so the baby any actual harm, so stop worrying about it and concentrate on your own children and let her worry about hers.

TheRealFellatio Thu 21-Mar-13 09:07:02

do, not so.

Mama1980 Thu 21-Mar-13 09:07:36

I'm afraid its none of your business. But- it would make me worry too, I weaned my very prem ds1 early due to a combination of factors (he had to have his bowel rebuilt etc.) but it was done on the advice if my dr and carefully monitored for reactions or any dropping off the centiles. And I have spoken with a early weaning friend who was horrified she wasn't following current advice and changed her mind but if your friend is well informed but has chosen I think you need t bite your tongue I'm afraid.

TheRealFellatio Thu 21-Mar-13 09:07:55

And personally I feel that leaving it until 6 months is too late. I don't actually care what the guidelines say.

noblegiraffe Thu 21-Mar-13 09:08:35

Can you not just say something like 'I've heard if they lose weight, giving more milk helps'? Not mentioning the bonkers early weaning at all. Or would any advice be stamped on?

HolidayArmadillo Thu 21-Mar-13 09:15:31

YANBU at all. She is obviously stupid. Inflammatory? Yes. But also true.

TheRealFellatio Thu 21-Mar-13 09:19:06

very very sad for the poor baby sad

Seriously, all of you who have babies now, presuming you are over 20 go and ask your mothers what age they starting giving you solid food. And then ask yourself if you think you should be the object of pity and concern over that, or whether you feel just fine and dandy and are suffering no obvious side effects.

Choose not to do it with your own babies by all means, but don't over-react as though it's some form of abuse or neglect.

tiggytape Thu 21-Mar-13 09:19:38

YABU - it isn't in line with current guidelines but your friend is allowed to make her own decisions. They are afterall guidelines not laws.

Things change all the time. The latest studies some say indicate harm from early weaning whereas 10 years ago early weaning was very common. It may all change (or be tweaked again) - who knows?!

The EAT study, mentioned before on MN and based at St Thomas’ Hospital in London, is looking at much earlier weaning (alongside continued breastfeeding) as a way of reducing food allergies. As part of the study babies are weaned at 3 months and also given foods traditionally thought of as 'bad' for babies like nuts and fish. Of course this is with regular check-ups and professional advice but the point is that nothing is final - research continues, guidelines change and in 5 years time it may all be very different.

Feminine Thu 21-Mar-13 09:24:04

Unless under instruction from a medical pro, I don't think she should be doing it.

I don't care what Mother's did before, research has to stand for something.

Actually, in the US weaning is not even suggested under 6 months!

My eldest is 14, at that time it was the norm to introduce solids at 4 months, I did. By the time I had my DD (10 yrs later) things had moved on. I took notice of latest info/help.

BTW, all of the first year is supposed to be an introduction to food...getting used to textures and learning how to eat.

Milk is supposed to be the main food for a long time after 4 months.

So...YANBU. not at all. smile

TheRealFellatio Thu 21-Mar-13 09:26:18

Absolutely tiggytape. I can't help thinking there is a link with the recent fad for late weaning and the avoidance of certain foods in the first two years with the prevalence of food allergies and intolerances.

tiggytape Thu 21-Mar-13 09:31:03

TheRealFellatio - that is totally the basis for the new research - that in Britain, we are told to wean later and also hold back introducing certain foods that children in other countries are given much earlier.
The study introduces solid food at 3 months (with breastmilk remaining the main food of course) and also introduces nuts, dairy, wheat and fish very early. The children will be followed until they are 3 and the presumption / hope is that these children will have lower incidents of food allergies as children elsewhere in the world do. Studies like this are an example of how guidelines may be tweaked or changed over many years and why what one generation of mothers follows and sticks to may not apply 10 or 20 years down the line.

Fluffycloudland77 Thu 21-Mar-13 09:31:58

I've got food allergies to cmp and I was on rusks at 2 weeks old because I woke at night.

LadyBeagleEyes Thu 21-Mar-13 09:32:09

I can't remember what age I waned ds now 17.
So that's how important it is in the scheme of things to me.

LadyBeagleEyes Thu 21-Mar-13 09:32:22


ICBINEG Thu 21-Mar-13 09:37:08

If baby is happy then YWBU to say anything. Given the baby is dropping centiles YWBU not to say anything.

wishingchair Thu 21-Mar-13 09:38:12

I have a 10 yo and a 6 yo. With the 10 yo the advice was to wean at 16 weeks so lots of us (on the advice of health visitors) were giving little bits of baby rice a couple of weeks earlier than that. By the time I had DD2 it had changed to 6 months. I made my own decision based on my knowledge of my baby and started solids prob around 17 weeks.

Things change. Neither child has any kind of allergy/skin/respiratory complaint whatsoever.

AThingInYourLife Thu 21-Mar-13 09:39:26

I'm 37. I was weaned at about 4 months.

I have no food allergies or intolerances.

I don't understand how you could get a 10 week old baby to eat solid food.

wishingchair Thu 21-Mar-13 09:39:31

(PS - I did make my own food though with the obv exception of baby rice ... e.g. puree pear etc ... and they were def not on 3 meals a day for quite a while)

sweetiepie1979 Thu 21-Mar-13 09:42:15

It's definitely not your place to say s

hackmum Thu 21-Mar-13 09:42:23

YANBU. I hate it when people say "it's none of your business". When does it become someone else's business? When they're slapping their child? Letting it starve? Locking it up in the cellar? Or is it always "your child, your rules"?

There's a reason for not weaning babies early - it's not some arbitrary whimsical thing dreamt up by health professionals to annoy parents. It's to avoid creating stomach and bowel problems later on. But if you do say something, you will seriously piss her off, and she probably won't change anyway.

YouTheCat Thu 21-Mar-13 09:44:11

There's a vast chasm of difference between locking a child in a cellar and weaning early though. confused

Pobblewhohasnotoes Thu 21-Mar-13 09:46:17

I don't care what people did 30 years ago, it's irrelevant. The 'it didn't do me any harm' rational is ridiculous and certainly shouldn't be used as an excuse.

My Mum used to put my carrycot on the back seat of the car. Doesn't mean I'd do the same.

I don't understand why people ignore guidelines (I know they're only guidelines). But if someone tells me that this is best for my baby based on the latest research and evidence, why would you ignore it?

I do feel though, that as a health professional I need to promote the latest advice. Doesn't mean I agree when people choose to do their own thing.

sweetiepie1979 Thu 21-Mar-13 09:47:27

Sorry, to say something. Don't say anything, it's. Ot your place.

Pobblewhohasnotoes Thu 21-Mar-13 09:47:54

The obvious danger at that age would be choking.

Snowfedup Thu 21-Mar-13 09:48:52

Just googled the EAT study , that's really interesting and makes sense to me:

Since the 1970s allergy has increased significantly in the UK: a study in South Wales showed that asthma rates doubled and eczema rates tripled between 1973 and 1988. Two successive studies from the Isle of Wight undertaken in 1989 and then 1994-1996 suggested that peanut allergy had doubled. These increases have coincided with a two-thirds reduction in early introduction of complementary foods. Therefore, it is possible that later introduction could promote food allergies. So the question is – is early introduction an effective approach or not to prevent food allergy in young children?

I realise its only anecdotal but my only friend who completely and totally avoided nuts when pregnant has a child with a peanut allergy and low and behold the advice about this has now changed !

LtEveDallas Thu 21-Mar-13 09:49:52

Myself and all 4 of my siblings were weaned 'early' as per the guidlines way back then. All 5 of us suffer from stomach and bowel complaints. DSD was also weaned early (10 weeks) and she too is suffering - which is devastating and embarassing for a 17 year old.

As a result of all the family ills, I investigated prior to having DD and came to the decision that she would be EBF, then weaned according to current guidlines (6 months), food was treated as 'fun' for the next 6 months and BLW (although I hadn't heard of it then!) was the way ahead. The only food I avoided was honey, and DD only ever ate what we were eating. I was lucky in that I was able to BF without many issues, and I really do think that helped - yes DD was a nightmare sleeper, but it is amazing what you can get used to when you have to!

DD is a very healthy little girl and I am hoping that what we chose to do will help to protect her against suffering like the rest of her family. We can only wait and see. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but I did it for the best of intentions, rather than for me.

stargirl1701 Thu 21-Mar-13 09:53:04

I was weaned at 12 weeks. I have eczema, asthma, hay fever and IBS.

babanouche Thu 21-Mar-13 10:00:12

Snowfedup, that's really interesting but equally there could be other factors involved ie the decline in breastfeeding and uptake in formula feeding, increase in central heating, increasing amounts of chemicals in everything around us and the spread of certain non-native foodstuffs. Also a small chance of diagnosis where previously there was none and people just lived with it.

Snowfedup Thu 21-Mar-13 10:01:47

Maybe though its really more about generics and family history ?

eavesdropping Thu 21-Mar-13 10:03:02

She's clearly not well informed if she started weaning at 7 weeks <shudders>

Anybody well-informed will know that 17 weeks is an ABSOLUTE MINIMUM and 6 months is preferable.

What used to happen 5 / 15 / 50 years ago is irrelevant - research has moved on. Not every baby weaned early will suffer ill effects - same as not every smoker will die an early death. Doesn't mean the risks aren't there though. Early weaning is associated with obesity, diabetes, allergies and digestive problems later in life.

As to whether you should say anything or not...I don't know. Depends on how she would take it I guess. Weaning that stupidly early though, I think I would find it hard to bite my tongue.

Pobblewhohasnotoes Thu 21-Mar-13 10:04:55

babanouche Thu 21-Mar-13 10:00:12
Snowfedup, that's really interesting but equally there could be other factors involved ie the decline in breastfeeding and uptake in formula feeding, increase in central heating, increasing amounts of chemicals in everything around us and the spread of certain non-native foodstuffs. Also a small chance of diagnosis where previously there was none and people just lived with it.

I guess there are a lot of variables that can't be controlled.

I think people worry too much about centile charts. Babies do go up and down in their weight, they also have growth spurts and suddenly wake up for feeds more often. They just need more milk for a bit, it doesn't mean they need rusks at 8 weeks old. Which are also packed full of sugar.

ubik Thu 21-Mar-13 10:07:19

I guess it's up to her.

many of my generation were weaned at 6 weeks. not saying it's right, but am sure she's had all the relevant leaflets etc from HV. It's her choice.

ubik Thu 21-Mar-13 10:09:49

I suppose you could ask her ie: "didn't you get the leaflet you fecking idiot, my HV says x,y,z - what does yours say...etc etc"

Losingexcessweight Thu 21-Mar-13 10:19:47


I have a dd who's just turned 5 months, she's not weaning, and to be honest I don't really want to wean at 6 months, I'd much rather wait till around 7 months as I think it must be better for her insides to be weaned at say 7 months than younger etc.

I mentioned this to the health visitor at the weighing clinic yesterday who told me I couldn't delay it and it had to be 6 months.

I think I ll decided at 6 months whether I want to delay it another month etc.

However on fb recently there are babies afew weeks younger than dd, And people were posting pics of their baby at 3 months old sat in high chairs, toy cars, eating food etc.

I silently disapprove to myself but would never comment on these posts or pictures on fb. Everyone parents differently and as long as you are doing the right thing then that's all that matters

SuffolkNWhat Thu 21-Mar-13 10:20:36

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

gnushoes Thu 21-Mar-13 10:22:11

I don't see why, if she is telling you her son is slipping down the centile charts, that it's wrong for you to remind her that milk has more calories than the weaning foods and that's why the advice is not to change the diet till six months. It's factual. I would hope a friend would do that for me -- we all do daft things sometimes, and she simply may not be making the connection.

ubik Thu 21-Mar-13 10:25:46

i knew a paediatrician who weaned her children at 4 months. She's looked at the evidence and decided that was an appropriate time.

I weaned mine at 5 months when they were about 17/18 pounds and started them on plain fruit purees

they don't appear to have grown horns yet

Feminine Thu 21-Mar-13 10:29:01

ubik your posts contradict themselves.


Feminine Thu 21-Mar-13 10:30:23

losing don't worry.

You would be in good company in the US.

As I said earlier, the first year is supposed to be an introduction to eating! smile

ConfuzzledMummy Thu 21-Mar-13 10:32:10

Keep your nose out, its not your child yabu.

Losingexcessweight Thu 21-Mar-13 10:32:42

Good company in the US?

ubik Thu 21-Mar-13 10:33:45

I think there's a difference between weaning your baby at 8 weeks and weaning them at 4 months.

I'm not endorsing weaning at 6 weeks - but many babies were with no ill-effects. I don't see leaving weaning as late as poss as some badge of honour - many people wean from 4 months onwards.

Feminine Thu 21-Mar-13 10:34:07

losing most Mums start the way you are describing.

Feminine Thu 21-Mar-13 10:35:08

I mean its not even suggested that one weans before 6 months.


Feminine Thu 21-Mar-13 10:37:20

Thing is, ill effects are not always seen in the early years.

Its too smug to think that just because your child seems fine at 8, that early weaning was a good idea.

Many problems present in adulthood.

Another thing to worry about I guess wink

Curtsey Thu 21-Mar-13 10:37:25

I was weaned between 3-4 months (as well as being breastfed). No allergy probs.
I weaned DD at 5 months. It is my totally unscientific opinion that 5 months is actually the perfect time to wean for many if not most babies - if they're showing interest. I feel that the 6-month guideline was drawn up with this in mind. (Because most people realistically won't make it to 6 months, but might make it to 5.)

obviously weaning a baby at 7 weeks is a nutso. But people still do it all the time. There is really no point in saying anything. It isn't child abuse.

ubik Thu 21-Mar-13 10:37:58

That's interesting because when i was weaning my children (3,6,8) the advice was between 4/6 months but hold off as long as you can.

Weaning at 4 months is very common

Thingiebob Thu 21-Mar-13 10:38:14

I'm confused. All the evidence and research says she shouldn't be doing this for very good reasons and the poster is concerned.

So why all the comments about 'keeping her nose out' and 'none of your business' and so on. Why is it ok to let a friend do something which is potentially dangerous to her child and not mention anything?

I probably would say something.

Why on earth do you care? Not your child, not your business.

Feminine Thu 21-Mar-13 10:39:55

Oh I know , I did 4 months with my eldest (now 14)

I think (in retrospect) it was a bit early.

I only B/fed him for a year as those seemed to be the advice given out then.

ubik Thu 21-Mar-13 10:41:12

I don't think it's "smug" to think that my child will be fine just because they are happy healthy children right now.

Conversely you could argue that it is "smug" to thinkj your child will be fine just "playing" with food for the first year - - advice changes all the time grin

And in reality it probably matters far more what you feed your child as they are growing up.

Feminine Thu 21-Mar-13 10:45:10

True. ubik I wasn't aiming my "smug" comment at yours btw.

But...(sorry) while digestive systems are developing I think we should be a bit careful. smile

tiggytape Thu 21-Mar-13 10:47:50

Guidelines are just that. They aren't definitely 'right' and everything else 'wrong'.
Every person here who has a child aged about 11-18 probably followed the guidelines with their own children. They did the right thing exactly as they were told by professionals. Except now that is the wrong thing!

And there's nothing to say the same cannot happen again - that in 10 years results of the new studies into food allergies will tell us that actually late weaning, whilst being good for the gut, might be the reason so many children are developing food allergies. Somebody with a baby today who has their next child much later on could be told totally different guidelines in line with new research.

chocoflump Thu 21-Mar-13 10:51:49


This really pisses me off. What's it to do with you what she feeds her child? I weaned both my children early, they are MY children and it was MY choice. Just like its YOUR choice when to wean YOUR children hmm

Pobblewhohasnotoes Thu 21-Mar-13 10:53:55

Because it may not be the best thing for the baby.

Pobblewhohasnotoes Thu 21-Mar-13 10:55:41

I wonder if all the people telling the OP that SIBU and should keep her nose out, are also the ones that weaned early.


ubik Thu 21-Mar-13 10:56:28

And there are degrees of poor weaning ...a housing officer friend was at a house recently where the mother was feeding the baby custard in a bottle 'to build him up.'

Feminine Thu 21-Mar-13 10:57:56

ubik goodness.

chocoflump Thu 21-Mar-13 10:58:19

But it's not her baby!!

The mum knows her child best. confused

Feminine Thu 21-Mar-13 10:58:30

pobble I suspect you may be correct grin

Feminine Thu 21-Mar-13 10:59:47

choco what does the Mum know?

not all, but mostly I suspect mum thinks she will get a better nights sleep, and its fun to play with ice-cream.

no deeper.

I was weaned early on rusk in my bottle.

When I had DS who is early-twenties, he was put on hungry baby milk on the advice of the HV at 3 weeks because he was "starving" and then weaned onto rusk and baby rice at 7 weeks. HV advice again.

Fast forward to DD who is 11 and all the advice had changed. She was weaned at 16 weeks and I was lazy so it was a bit hit and miss and a lot of BLW only I didn't know it was called that.

Advice is just advice, it's not the law, and it changes all the time.

tiggytape Thu 21-Mar-13 11:03:49

There are guidelines about when to change carseats and which way they should face - not everybody obeys them because their children are very tall but light for their age or sick travelling backwards or whatever.

There are guidelines about feeding older children a healthy diet with plenty of fruit and veg and using suitable portion sizes but not everyone obeys them for many reasons or has a child who will not eat what they want them to.

There are guidelines about vaccinations but people make up their own minds on this issue.

Weaning is no different. Many parenting decisions have health implications that have to be weighed up against that family's circumstances / the individual child and the parents' beliefs or wishes. All of us make out own choices and if this woman is well informed she has made hers. It might not be one othes agree with but she is free to do that just as other parents are free to disregard the advice on other issues as many do - not through ignorance but choice.

Pobblewhohasnotoes Thu 21-Mar-13 11:04:32

chocoflump Thu 21-Mar-13 10:58:19
But it's not her baby!!

The mum knows her child best.

Not the OP! I meant the mum!

So the mum magically knows that her baby needs rusks and baby rice at eight weeks? Despite the fact that babies get their calorie intake from milk not food, and that feeding early can cause gut problems. That a baby waking up overnight is normal, they are suposed to, that they dont need baby rice to fill them up so they don't. That larger babies have the same gut maturity as any others. Did her baby reach out for the rusk? I doubt it.

Mums don't always know best. She is either uninformed in which case she needs to see her HV, or she's choosing to ignore any information she was given. In which case she's an idiot. It's about making informed decisions.

chocoflump Thu 21-Mar-13 11:04:43

Feminine do you know this mother? How do u know that?

I didn't feed my children early to get a better nights sleep or because it was fun. I fed them because I know my children and I know they were ready for weaning.

We were all weaned way before the 6 month stage- why have we not all got bowel problems and intolerances?

Intolerances are actually more common now than they used to be.

Anyway- you do what you want to do with your children and don't judge others for their choices. Weaning early does not make you a bad mother.

Feminine Thu 21-Mar-13 11:08:59

no, choco it doesn't make you a bad mother.

How did you know they were ready? what did they do?

Yes, our generation were weaned earlier. There are masses of people of my age group (40's) that suffer from dreadful bowl problems.

We learn all the time. Things have changed massively since I had my first in '98.

Pobblewhohasnotoes Thu 21-Mar-13 11:12:08

I've got IBS, so has my Mum. My brother and I both had eczema as children.

I just don't understand how you can tellian eight week old is ready to wean, what are you basing that on?

MooMooSkit Thu 21-Mar-13 11:12:59

I think YABU to say something but I don't think you are being unreasonable to silently judge. Unless you start seeing signs that the baby is not well, not progressing then I wouldn't say anything if I was you.

I don't think as well the whole thing about what was in the past is relevant. I was born in the mid 80's and was weaned from an early age and have no issues aside from epilepsy which is obviously genetic as both my grandads have it but then obviously there are children weaned early who do have issues so no one really knows what causes these things do they?

I waited till my LO was 6 months though (well, with a try of a mushed up rusk 2 weeks before he turned 6 months)

tiggytape Thu 21-Mar-13 11:14:19

Rear facing car seats until age 2 is another guideline that has come in since mine were born (10 years ago, you just waited until they weighed enough to go forward facing).
There are endless studies that prove this is the best way for toddlers to travel yet few people do it. It is hard to get the proper seats here because the British population shows less demand for them than other countries, they are expensive and most people don't want their 18 months old squashed up in a rear facing seat even though the studies show forward facing is much more dangerous for them.
Are there lots of people all tutting at their friends who let their toddlers travel forward facing even though it is dangerous?

Things change the other way too. 10 years ago co-sleeping was totally banned as far as health professionals were concerned. If your HV found out you were doing it (even by accident - baby coming into bed to feed) you'd get the lecture to end all lectures and another stack of SIDS leaflets. That seems to have changed too now.

Feminine Thu 21-Mar-13 11:16:37

I think we understand more about food allergy than in previous generations.

We are better diagnosed. That is why there appears to be more.

It common sense that a baby will have an immature digestive system surely?

confused if not suggested by a health worker then its not needed IMO.

Pobblewhohasnotoes Thu 21-Mar-13 11:22:00

I don't think SIDS is promoted as much as it should be. But as for the co-sleeping, research changes and is updated all the time. Now they recommend a dummy and cot bumpers have been taken off the risk list (as far as I'm aware).

It's very difficult to get rear facing car seats for older children.

Basing what you do now on what people did thirty years ago doesn't make any sense. As a nurse surely you want me to do my job based on the latest research and evidence. Why is bringing up a child different?

BearFrills Thu 21-Mar-13 11:24:43

Anyway- you do what you want to do with your children and don't judge others for their choices. Weaning early does not make you a bad mother.


The 'rules' are not one size fits all and, like adults, babies are all individuals with individual needs. What is right for one is not always right for another and when you boil parenting down to the bare bones we're all just doing the best we can, as well as we can.

DS was started on mush at 15wks. He was demand-fed but was pounding 8oz of milk and screaming for more however he couldn't physically hold more, he'd just sick up the excess. Around 4pm-ish was the worst time. He'd have a feed around 3:30pm, then want another one by 4pm, then another by 4:30pm. We tried splitting feeds, offering slightly less but more often, and so on. It was our GP suggested giving him food so we did, once a day at tea time a small amount of food after his milk. He was much happier for it. It had nothing to do with him sleeping through (he'd been doing that since 6wks) or wanting to rush ahead, it was what fit him.

DD was the complete opposite. She was BF but I very quickly lost my milk as she was sleeping through from birth and going 3-4 hours between feeds during the day then only feeding for a short time. She's a dinky little thing and just doesn't eat much. Even when we switched to FF at around 5-6wks she was only having 3oz every 3-5 hours (demand-fed also) and sleeping all night. We tried her with food at 5mo on the advice of the HV, to try get more calories into her, and she was having none of it. We tried again at 6mo and she had lots of choking issues as she refused to chew and just swallowed everything whole including an entire piece of broccoli! We tried again at 7mo with mush which she grudgingly accepted then at 9mo she decided table food was much more to her liking. It wasn't until she was around a year old that she actually started eating a full three meals a day and even now the equivalent of 2-3 tablespoons of food is enough to satisfy her.

They're all different and while YANBU to have your opinion, and to silently judge if that is your want, YABU to say anything. Her baby, her rules. She's breaking no laws.

dollyindub Thu 21-Mar-13 11:25:52

I was a huge baby, 11lb 3oz. My mum was young when she had me and was breast feeding, but then my Irish granny swooped in and told my mum that I was crying because I was hungry and promptly fed me baby rice in a bottle.
At 2 weeks old hmm

However my mum said I thrived on it, I was weaned early and thankfully I don't have any problems now.
I don't think YABU to be concerned, but it's her child and he/she will probably be fine. If there are any problems they will be picked up by healthcare professionals anyway.

MoominmammasHandbag Thu 21-Mar-13 11:28:20

Just anecdotal but I was FF and weaned at 6 weeks. I have completely healthy guts, eat anything.
DD was EBF to 14 months, first tastes of food at 6 months. At 17 she has big IBS problems controlled by medication, is also lactose intolerent and often has reactions to other seemingly random foods.
I think a lot more research needs to be done.

I was weaned at 4 months. My DCs were too.

However, milk was still the main food for quite a while afterwards, which seems to be the line taken by the advice to "introduce foods". DCs ate what DP and I ate, with obvious exceptions such as honey under the age of 1, etc.

DD disgustingly healthy. DS has a mild bowel issue which he is growing out of. Can't say his bowl problem is related to the weaning, as many of my family (both Dad's and Mum's) have been diagnosed with bowel disorders, and he may have developed this anyway regardless of when he weaned. I haven't developed any bowel disorders, I have mild hayfever, specific to oil seed rape, and an allergy to nickel, otherwise I am healthy.

I guess other factors may always have an influence.

Yfronts Thu 21-Mar-13 11:51:49

She is obviously not well informed. She would know about the problems associated with early weaning if that was the case and would wait till 6 months.

Yfronts Thu 21-Mar-13 11:54:04

Thank goodness people are starting to understand more about health and diet these days. There is such an obvious link.

HugeFloweryPants Thu 21-Mar-13 13:12:30

I'm the op,

a lot of being who are saying they did it early did it at 4-5 months, fair enough, I don't have issue with that really (though it's not my choice) but this is a baby less that half that age! At 4 month they have reasonable head control and possibly no tongue thrust reflux. Looking at dd at 7/8 weeks her head is still unstable and I wonder how she'd swallow...

Pigsmummy Thu 21-Mar-13 13:17:24

Leave her to it, baby is happy and fed. Don't say anything

meddie Thu 21-Mar-13 13:31:31

both mine had mush at 3 months as was the current guidelines at the time, I have pictured of my DD at 6 months in her high chair munching a slice of pizza. Neither have bowel issues or eczema or asthma. Times change, guidelines change. In a few years the advice will probably change again. I really wouldnt get that worked up about it.

TooExtraImmatureCheddar Thu 21-Mar-13 13:39:35

Why anyone would want to wean early is beyond me. I found it incredibly stressful (and still do, even though DD is 1 now) worrying about what to feed her, how much, was anything going in, what to do when she decides to eat nothing but yoghurt for a week, cleaning up the highchair after every meal, trying to get her to use a spoon and not feed the dog...the days when I just plugged her onto the boob were much easier!

TrishkanOEUFak Thu 21-Mar-13 13:46:12

My partner was weaned at 8 weeks on spaghetti bolognese whizzed up in a food processor. He now has severe INS and other digestive issues. I was 4 months (not sure how many weeks, mum didn't write it down), started on pureed fruit and veg and am fine. Not conclusive undeniable evidence of course, but then again neither is "I weaned mine at 10 weeks and they're fine".

I wouldn't say anything to a friend if they were weaning early, despite not liking it personally it really wouldn't be any of my business. But I would think she was wrong to do it.

TrishkanOEUFak Thu 21-Mar-13 13:47:11

IBS even, not INS.

BearFrills Thu 21-Mar-13 13:50:41

As an aside, when DD was born in 2011 I got a letter from some university in London (can't remember the name) asking me if I'd like to take part in a research project about weaning. To take part I had to be willing to start weaning at 12wks and the project was going to last several years.

I'm guessing someone somewhere is conducting research into the weaning guidelines.

tiggytape Thu 21-Mar-13 13:58:10

BearFrills - that is the EAT study
It isn't strictly full weaning as babies must be breastfed too but solids are introduced from 12 weeks onwards. The theory is that so many food allergies are a result of late weaning and late introduction of 'risky' foods like nuts and fish that perhaps it is better to actually introduce these foods much earlier than we currently do in the UK.

The EAT study will follow children who have these foods introduced from 3 months onwards until they are 3 to see if the theory is correct

BearFrills Thu 21-Mar-13 14:04:44

Yes! That's the one, thanks tiggy smile

MiaowTheCat Thu 21-Mar-13 14:23:55

I'm amazed. No one's done the I'd ring social services melodrama thing yet.

Since kids don't come with a handy manual from the actual manufacturer as of yet, and the guidance is collected research, guesswork and premptimg stupidity- I trust my friends to make the correct decisions for their children. Sometimes they're probably not- but no one has all the answers and people also have the right to find their own path.

I would have been pissed at you for bugging her over the colostrum thing tho btw, because that did show you weren't respecting her choices even then.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now