Advanced search

Anyone's 17-22 week old baby baby led weaned themselves??

(15 Posts)
nappyaddict Mon 31-Aug-09 21:56:04

My friend's baby is 4 months old and today swiped some banana off her whilst she wasn't looking. She asked me for advice and I said I only knew of 5 month old babies being BLW a bit early but no experience of younger ones so I said I'd ask on here for her.

ThePinkOne Mon 31-Aug-09 22:11:15

DS was 21 weeks and 3 days and I was horrified (although I let him) when he picked up, bit and swallowed a bit of banana!! But 5 months not 4!

I carried on and took it very slowly - only fruit and veg til 6 months and only breakfast and tea until about 6 months too when he started being awake for lunch a bit more.

The idea is that when they can do it, then it's ok so I guess if he really did eat it then it can't hurt! Although my friend's DS was also younger than 6 months when DS1 gave him some carrot and it gave him awful tummy ache all night so she stopped again for a couple of weeks and he to took to it much better when he was that bit older.


thisisyesterday Mon 31-Aug-09 22:16:16

well i guess the first thing i would point out is that babies do grab stuff, and they purt everythi8ng in their mouths.

so grabbing and mouthing a piece of banana does not necessarily indicate a readiness for solids.

the theory behind BLW is that if a baby is capable of 1) sitting up unaided, 2) grasping food, 3) chewing and swallowing food
then internally they are probably ready to digest it just fine.

if her child can do all these things then great. if not then wait
i guess the way i see it is that there COULD be harm caused by starting early. but there is NO harm in waiting.

Reallytired Mon 31-Aug-09 22:25:10

In the not too distant past it was recommended that babies were weaned at 3 months, then it was changed to 4 months, 4 to 6 months and now 6 months. Most school children were weaned at 4 months and are absolutely fine.

Prehaps early weaning is a waste of time nutrionally, but its not fatal. I suspect that the guidelines have been changed to 6 months to dispersaude brain dead people who give chips to 6 week old babies.

My daughter is 20 weeks and she swallowed a small bite of carrot by accident. It went through her completely undigested. I don't think it has done her any harm, but she gained nothing from eating the carrot. For that reason I am not weaning her.

Babies are interested in anything at 4 to 6 months. I think babies can be interested in the social side of meal times without actually needing food.

thisisyesterday Mon 31-Aug-09 22:28:34

sorry but the argument that we used to do things a certain way and it "did us no harm" is really dumb.

show me proof that it did no children any harm

i doubt very much that the WHO base their guidelines on just arbitrarily wanting to stop idiots giving chips at 6 weeks.

Reallytired Tue 01-Sep-09 14:50:51

Parenting is often based on fashion and opinon. There aren't many babies whose mothers exclusively breastfeed to 26 weeks. In fact breastfeeding statistics are pretty awful in the UK. Very few babies have breastmilk in any form at 6 months.

Families decide what is best for them. Babycare is just as much an art as a science.

tiktok Tue 01-Sep-09 17:31:30

Parenting is indeed often based on fashion and opinion.

UK weaning guidance isn't.

It comes from (mainly) the large systematic review carried out a few years ago which looked at good quality research, and which concluded there were no downsides in recommending, as a public health policy, support for exclusive bf to 6 mths.

It has nothing to do with discouraging chips at 6 weeks, though of course individual advice givers like HVs may think of it like that.

Babycare can be an art, I agree - by which you mean a matter of judgement, rather than a precise set of instructions. Totally.

But public health guidance and policy - what is known to be encouraging and supportive of good health - should wherever possible be based on science, shouldn't it?

LuluMaman Tue 01-Sep-09 17:34:17

if he was sitting unaided at the time and grabbed the banana, got it to his mouth, with no tongue thrust reflex, chewed and swallowed it then fine

if he was sitting supported on her lap and grabbed it and mouthed it as that is what babies do with anything and everything, i'd say no it's not fine

TBH, at such a young age, i would be inclined to say it was an accident and leave it fora while , especally if he is not showing any other physical signs of readiness for weaning

at this age, he really just needs milk

was your friend planning on BLW?

PinkTulips Tue 01-Sep-09 18:06:57

ds1 was 21 weeks when he stole food so i started offering him some food to play with once a day. He was a huge baby (almost 9kgs), could sit unaided and actually picked up the food, put it in his mouth, chewed and swallowed.... not gnawed on a chunk of food and accidentally consumed some.

He didn't actually consume much til after 6 months but some did go in and he really enjoyed it so i'm glad i followed his cues and went for it.

However without seeing what actually happened with your friend's baby i'd be hesitant to recommend that as ds2 often snatched stuff out of my grip and mouthed it from 4 months on but was by no means ready for solids until much, much later.

pooexplosions Tue 01-Sep-09 20:15:27

At 4 months they also chew their fists, it doesn't mean they are ready for cannabalism. Wait until 6 months.

peppapighastakenovermylife Wed 02-Sep-09 17:42:30

My DS weaned himself at 18/19 weeks. However he was capable of feeding himself. He was developmentally ready by BLW standards - could sit unsupported for example, bring food to his mouth, chew etc. I never fed him - he fed himself, but only fruit and veg.

DD I waited until 26 weeks but went by her lead again.

nappyaddict Thu 03-Sep-09 02:47:03

That's the same as my friend's DD - she is 18 weeks too. Did your DS also start by accidentally stealing something and then you decided to offer him stuff of his own?

pooexplosions Thu 03-Sep-09 10:01:37

I don't understand that point. Just because they take somethin out of your hand or off your plate and put it in their mouths doesn't mean their digestive systems are developed enough for soild food.
If they reached into a plant pot and put the soil in their mouths, you wouldn't assume that they are ready to eat bowls of dirt, would you?

Before around 6 months they lack the correct enzymes and digestive ability, thats a simple proven fact. If for some reason you want to feed them before that point, you can, its your baby, it doesn't mean its a good idea. Your baby probably has 80 years of eating solid food ahead of them, what on earth is the rush to start at 4-5 months old?

tiktok Thu 03-Sep-09 11:52:15

The 'drive' to give solids, the angst about picking the right moment and watching for it, with the concommitant pressure to do it earlier than any health-based rationale has shown, the illogicality (yes) of expecting that a few spoons of relatively low-calorie puree a day will help a baby sleep 'better' hours later, the idea that somehow 'my baby is different/special/advanced and needs food sooner than other babies''s all cultural.

'Rattling the plate' an old article (2001) and uses research that took place years before guidance on weaning age change, but its basic premise remains the same, I think ie that rigid guidance on age does not sit well with mothers and healthcare professionals who are influenced in many other ways.

cathnet Thu 15-Oct-09 20:31:24

Tiktok - do you happen to have the ref. for the systematic review?

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