when do babies need shoes?

[GruffaloMama]

DS is 10 mo. Started pulling himself up. Not cruising yet (but think it might be soon). Woman in Clarks said he needs shoes now. (But then she would, wouldn't she?) Is this a scam or am I being really tight by thinking little naked feet are fine until he starts walking outside etc.?

[thisisyesterday]

doesn't n eed anything until he is walking and you want him to be able to walk outside,

best thing is bare feet to ensure feet develop naturally

[DjangoTheDjinn]

When walking confidently. About 6 weeks of proper walking minimum. They don't need cruising shoes or first shoes or whatever it is they market them as.

[GrimmaTheNome]

I'm with you on this. Why would anyone need shoes inside?

[AitchTwoOh]

bare feet or those little leather slipper things are fine for aaaages yet.

[Alibabaandthe40nappies]

I'm leaving DS with bare feet until he's ready to walk outside. When it's cold he has socks on, but just bare toes at home - the same as me!

[KnickKnack]

bare feet until he is walking outside

[KnickKnack]

and by outside I mean somewhere he would need shoes, bare foot would still be fine for grass etc!

[oneopinionatedmother]

clarks woman speak with fork tongue.

shoes no need until go hot-foot to park.

[secretgardin]

bare feet is fine and soft shoes for outside. clarks will only try and sell you the cruiser shoes and then tell you to come back in a couple of months when walking is established (as they need thicker soles). all crap to make you end up spending £60 on 2 pairs of shoes, of which one will probably end up lost in a couple of days, due to the shoe dropping without mummy looking game, which little ones are so fond of at that age

[HarryB]

Thank god for this thread. Family keep on about buying my DS shoes, but I can't see the point until he can walk. We did relent in early summer and bought him a pair of sandals but even at 5 months he kicked them off so will get shoes when shoes needed.

[EyeballsintheSky]

Yes, to echo secretgardin, let me tell you of the fun game that dd and I played round Marks' one afternoon. Browsing the food hall when I notice she's taken her shoe off. So I whipped it out of her hand, stuck it under the buggy and thought no more. Until the check out when I realise the other one is gone. And I mean gone. We had a pleasant half an hour scouring the aisles, me crawling under shelves and working out where the £28 for replacement shoes was coming from and wanting to beat dd with a big stick (joke) until eventually a nice M&S lady said it had been handed in.

And she had been properly walking outside for 6 months at this point. Shoes are the work of the devil until absolutely needed, no matter how much you are dying to buy that first pair. Step away from Clarks

[TheApprentice]

I'm glad about this thread, this is a real bugbear of mine! Ds2 turns one this week and has never worn shoes (he is cruising round furniture now but not walking independently yet). Whenever I meet up with friends with wee ones, some of them only a matter of weeks old, he is the only one not wearing shoes!! (ok, the tiny babies are wearing those leather bootee types but ds2 has never had those either!). He doesnt need them, in fact its much better for his feet to be bare at this stage I think. But it seems socially unacceptable - I've had shop assistants say "he's lost his shoes" etc!

I must confess that I did buy ds1 pre walkers at this age, but that was because it was the middle of winter and he kept pulling his socks off in the buggy and the shoes at least kept them on, so his feet did not get cold! But at this time of year theres no need for that at all, so ds2 will wait till he is walking before I fork out £30 odd quid for a pair of shoes he won't fit for v long!

[liath]

I agree, shoes are the work of the devil. Bare feet will help the foot's development. Friends of mine stuck their dd in shoes as soon as she started cruising and she was never out of them - now she has terrible flat feet.

I only fork out for "proper" shoes in the winter. In the summer they are barefoot so much that it's a waste of money - they have cheap wellies or sandals for when we're out.

[TheApprentice]

Oh yeah, and can sympathise with eyeballs - I have found Startrite shoes better - ds1 has never had any he could take off himself!!

[3cutedarlings]

both My DDs had clarks cruisers but only because they stared cruising in the winter months and with the various playgroups ect, some of which were bloody freezin. I could have just bought the soft leather shoo shoo type slippers but with both girls i managed to get them a pair in the clarks sale and they used them until they had outgrown them and then went into proper shoes. I would buy them again for DS (5mths) if i picked up a bargain, as they were lovely and soft. Do agree tho that bare footed is the best thing for them.

[EyeballsintheSky]

LOL, bloody velcro! Who the hell thought that was a good idea for toddlers' shoes??

Although someone is bound to come along in a minute and declare that it's my parenting at fault, not my 18 month old's determination and single-mindedness... Has happened a lot here lately...

[GruffaloMama]

Brill - thanks everyone. i had a suspicion that I was being had. V glad I didn't succumb! I love MN. It's just saved me £30 at least. Hurray!!!

[Peabody]

I have bought cruising shoes for both my kids, but in my defence this was, both times, just before we went on a muddy camping trip.