to wonder what the point of baby socks and baby shoes is?

[Asturimama]

I think it would be easier to keep an eel on a lead than to make them stay on....

Surely it's not so difficult to make outdoor trousers with feet on them?

OK, rant over...

NatashaBee You're evidently not alone, whatever your train of thought was! I saw lots of flip-flops for sale last year. Were they from M&S or Mothercare?

Baby shoes are for making women broody. There's just something about tiny shoes!

My little boy now 18months and running every where especially in the muddy park but he loves it still loses his shoes. I got so fed up with it that i have now tied ribbon to the tongue thingy on his trainers and threaded them through his trousers. They cost 22 pounds and i was not planning on losing them. It takes a bit longer to dress/undress him but he cannot lose them. He can still get them off but it means that they are just dangling by the ribbon, like my mittens used to dangle from my elastic when i was a kid! Saves one hell of a lot of money and hasnt lost a shoe since. He was going through a pair of shoes per outing! x

Look cute, on and off, but a total waste of money as they're guaranteed to get lost
DS wears DD's old tights, even the butterfly ones. :o

Although I do remember one of the first times I felt we had a proper family home was when I found one of DD's stray socks under the sofa after she'd gone to bed one night.

Socks stop old ladies grabbing their toes and announcing "ooh his feet are cold, why isn't he wearing socks?", even in a heatwave.

DD had really long legs (actually she probably still does) so couldn't wear babygros with feet. Socks were therefore essential. No idea why you would buy shoes for a baby who can't walk as they just seem likely to damage their feet.

I hated "sock-ons". I guess my son had fat feet... tried them and they fit for about a month when he was 3 or 4 months old, and then they were leaving marks on his feet, though sold as "3-12 months" or some such rubbish. I started buying white, red and navy tights for him and never looked back. There are loads of colours out there that aren't pink, and they are 1) warmer than sox, 2) up around the waist and so can't be pulled off 3) don't leave indentations from the elastic around their legs - I hate that.

I got my DS plain blue or white tights from primark when he got old enough to show an interest in his feet. It was hilarious watching him try to pull those off.
I like the shoe ribbon idea though and may well pass that advice on to my nursery parents
Sock ons look like some kind of torture device though, I'm not a fan myself no matter how trendy they are.

I put socks on my daughter to stop her feet getting cold in light of the facts that
a. it's winter
and
b. booties are ludicrously hard to come by, especially since baby clothes in this country are sold by some mythical 'age size' which is no use for big strapping girls

H&M have longish baby socks that always stayed on for us. trousers with feet are a pain unless there's elastic around the heel (which there never is) because apart from teh one week that they fit exactly, the feet either hang down or pull the gusset down.

and shoes + an extra layer. It's cold.

No point. All-in-one waistless suits, sleeveless, legless, short or long-sleeved, rompers, cotton or fleecy, with or without blankets when out and about until two a year old is the way to go. Sod the snarky comments from the HV. If clothes are clean on in the morning then they are not "pyjamas"

This doesn't apply to adults by the way

Gap socks, much harder to pull off, and inch blue shoes for helping keep socks on. They are nice soft leather slipper type shoes.