Advanced search

to truly, honestly not give a feck what age other people wean their kids?

(178 Posts)
themildmanneredaxemurderer Mon 27-Oct-08 11:16:33

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

harleyd Mon 27-Oct-08 11:17:39

i dont give a shit either

CapnJadetheKnife Mon 27-Oct-08 11:17:40

I don't either.

mishymoo Mon 27-Oct-08 11:18:28

I couldn't care less either!

VinegArghhhWasStabbedInTheTits Mon 27-Oct-08 11:18:55

YANBU i dont give a feck eiother, gets on my tits when the weaning brigade jump on other mums for not doing it their way

lilymolly Mon 27-Oct-08 11:19:10

me neither
the bloody advice changes every few years anyway so, I would not be so quick to judge those who weaned early

hunkermunker Mon 27-Oct-08 11:20:09

I don't give a crap about women who don't give a crap either.

I do care about women who are looking for information about their babies though. I'd like them to have evidence-based, decent stuff, not just "oh, do whatever the fuck you like, who cares?". You're a fan of the latter, maybe?

hunkermunker Mon 27-Oct-08 11:20:30

Lilymolly, no, the advice doesn't change all the time.

CoteDAzur Mon 27-Oct-08 11:22:01

Yes, actually it does.

It was 4 months when DD was born, 3 years ago.

Now it's 6 months.

ExtraFancy Mon 27-Oct-08 11:23:16

A lot of the time it does seem to be fly-by judging...but there are a few posters (eg VictorianSqualor) who care because they want people to make informed decisions about things like weaning - rather than judging and insisting people do it 'their way' they are just trying to make sure that folk are aware of possible risks with v v early weaning etc.

As for me? I'm in the 'don't give a feck' camp, for the most part wink

hunkermunker Mon 27-Oct-08 11:24:10

Cote, it was 6 months when DS1 was born, 4.6 years ago. It was 6 months when DS2 was born, 2.9 years ago. It's been 6 months for a long time. Your HV may have been not up to date - but the guidelines were 6 months when your child was born.

themildmanneredaxemurderer Mon 27-Oct-08 11:24:31

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MrsMattie Mon 27-Oct-08 11:26:03

It's an important issue and I can understand why people like VS are so interested in it. Lots of misinformation out there, and it's important to redress the balance.

However, it does get done to death on MN, and some posters do go way over the top with it. It's a bit like the whole FF / BF thing. When people get over zealous in their approach it is off putting.

GodzillasGhastlyPutridBumcheek Mon 27-Oct-08 11:26:53

LOL what is the point in caring what age someone is going to wean their LO - they will do it anyway whether you care or not!

CoteDAzur Mon 27-Oct-08 11:27:11

So "Don't wean before 6 months" is 'evidence-based, decent stuff'?

What was "Wean at 4 months" of a few years ago, then?

These recommendations are educated guesses. They are not the literal word of God.

hunkermunker Mon 27-Oct-08 11:27:59

People are zealous about saying "Why are you so interested in it" and "Who gives a fuck" too though, it would seem... So those who have an interest in ensuring women get decent info often have to defend their reasons - oh, look, I'm doing it now.

lilymolly Mon 27-Oct-08 11:29:09

advice does was only a few years ago that women where told 14-16 weeks.

And whilst I totally appreciate that yes women should be given all the facts and make informed decisions- god it must be hard not to see the facts- they are bloody everywhere.

At the end of the day- hv will advice 26 weeks/6months and it is up to the parents if they choose to follow this.

If some stupid mum decides to give bloody rusks in a bottle of fecking greggs pasty and blue pop, then thats up to them.

This topic is just like Breastfeeding

Its personal choice

CoteDAzur Mon 27-Oct-08 11:29:24

3 years ago, it was 4 months here in France.

If you are going to argue "Oh, there was evidence that weaning at 4 months harms the child but France didn't know about it", I would like to see that evidence please.

(Evidence, as in results of scientific research/experiments. Not "WHO said...")

hunkermunker Mon 27-Oct-08 11:30:05

No, Cote, because God doesn't exist...

It's been six months for years. Policy needed to catch up so that it could be actual DoH guidance. But think about it - weaning was "4-6 months" - everyone took it as "start at 4 months" not "between 4 and 6 months", which it meant.

Evidence-based, or manufacturer-driven? They're certainly not happy about changing their packaging to be in line with the 6m guidance.

unaccomplishedfattylegalmummy Mon 27-Oct-08 11:30:33

Nah I don't give a crap either. When dd1 was a baby the advice was 4 months I weaned dd1 at 3 months on purees. shock With dd2 the advice was/is 6 months I did BLW and didn't start till she was 8 months. They're both still bloody fussy eaters. Both still have eczema (runs in the family). Damned if you do damned if you don't IMO.

wannaBe Mon 27-Oct-08 11:30:55

If people are so bothered about giving others the right information, then why are they not studying to be midwives/health visitors so that they can provide all the support that the health profession is apparently not providing?

It never ceases to amaze me the number of threads on mn that state "oh don't listen to your health visitor, she's misinformed, here, read information off the internet instead." Because the internet is always such a reliable source of information isn't it. hmm

lilymolly Mon 27-Oct-08 11:31:21

I would love to see some EBM on the weaning guidlines if anyone has any- you know randomised controlled studies.

Genuine request btw

hunkermunker Mon 27-Oct-08 11:31:22

LM, HVs don't advise 6m though, often, really often.

Cote, I have no idea what they were doing in France. The guidelines are issued by the WHO though, and since France is in the world, I would imagine they were the same for there too.

hunkermunker Mon 27-Oct-08 11:32:10

Wannabe, ever occur to you that some people ARE studying to be midwives/HCPs or doing other work to support them?

MrsMattie Mon 27-Oct-08 11:35:59

But hunker - the threads about weaning aren't always inclusive, let's face it. People get flamed for having an opinion that goes against you/VS etc (and I am not criticising you guys - I think you're great)

As the other thread going on at the moment proves - there is no room for anecdotal evidence from mothers who have weaned early (although anecdotal evidence from anyone else is fine, it would seem...?).

Look, I'm not 'pro' early weaning. And I'm all for sharing information on MN - it's what it's all about. But - just like the FF / BF thing - it's important to be realistic about the fact that any threads which are seen to criticise women for doing things they are already doing / have already done (ie. weaned before 6 mths) are going to get a bit of stick.

Join the discussion

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

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: