AIBU... MIL and Chocolate!

[Stardust1901]

I've name changed as this is possibly outing.

I'm pretty annoyed but don't know how to approach this.

Yesterday MIL babysat for us so DP and I could go out for a bit. Lovely! We are very grateful.

However once we get back and MIL leaves, I start to tidy up. MIL has given my baby (5months) half a bar of chocolate. She didn't ask if it was ok or anything, I'm quite annoyed.

I'm not one of those who believes 'she babysat for you so just be grateful' but I don't know how to approach it and tell MIL that I'm not happy without coming across as ungrateful.

This thread is like a game of mumsnet bingo

Half a chocolate bar is loads for a small baby! I was having choc at tgat age but a small suck of a lollipop, nowhere near an entire bar. Agree weaning at 5 months wont hurt though.

There's no point falling out over this. She probably let baby have a suck of chocolate. She'd probably have an upset stomach if she'd eaten a lot.

Just politely thank your mil for her help with babysitting and ask her not to give her grandchild food in future as it's not recommended before 6 months nowadays. She'll probably be mortified that you are upset about this.

There's no need to for hysterics though.

I was weaned early, and I have loads of allergies and am overweight. Not dead obviously but I'd still prefer to have been weaned differently.

To the weaning/survive comment. Lots of babies born to smoking mums (for eg.) 'survive', but we know how much damage is done and advice has changed. Funnily enough people want more than their children to just 'survive', they want whats best for their health long term.

I started eating solids when I was one. So we're my immediate cousins and my little sister.

We don't have any allergies (well, I get pimples from milk, but that would be a slight intolerance) and none of us is overweight. That may obviously just be a coincidence, but who knows?

Exactly laiste. My dh had rusks put in his bottle from an early age and has eczema and asthma - could have been caused by early weaning. Also major choking hazard and full of sugar but hey he survived.

A bit of chocolate isn't ideal but it won't have caused lasting damage.
Early weaning; consistently giving foods from an early age may cause problems but a one off would not.

All of my siblings and I were weaned at 12 weeks and none of us are overweight or have allergies. There is not always a direct correlation and it's a bit alarmist to suggest that is the case.

3 children - all weaned early. NO allergies. My SIL all her 3 children weaned early - NO allergies. Children at school nowadays with allergies - loads mmm..

and none of us overweight either.
I agree, completely alarmist. It wont have done your baby any harm.

Sucking on a chocolate bar once isn't weaning.

I would be quite annoyed by this too, however I appreciate you MIL is likely to have thought she was doing good, giving the wee one someone a treat. I suspect MIL didn't consider up-to-date guidance before doing so.

I say wait until you feel calm and advice her that you would prefer not to have any more treats until [whatever timescale you feel is best].

*advise

I would go fucking batshit. What a stupid, irresponsible, bitch. Giving chocolate to a 5mo? WTF is wrong with her? She would never be allowed alone with the baby again after that.

coco relax!!!

I don't care - it is the parent who decides when the child gets chocolate, nobody else. I would be fuming if somebody gave my DC chocolate when they were 5 months old. There is a reason why they say no solids until after 26 weeks and chocolate is not one of the foods introduced then. That poor baby could've gotten very ill from that.

Maybe the MIL took out her false teeth and sucked on the chocolate herself?

It really doesn't matter how much chocolate the baby was given or that you weaned your child in the 1970s/1800s when they were 3 months old/4 months old. In 2016, research has shown that its best to wait until 6 months old and looks like OP has chosen to wait and that is up to her to make that decision for her child.

OP's MIL has made the decision to go against the babys mother's wishes and give food (unhealthy food whichever way you look at it - at that) to a baby that isn't hers. Thats what i think this issue is here.

Sometimes I think its MIL and DMs insecurity of being excluded from something they have enjoyed previously or feeling their advice is being ignored which leads to do something like that.

Think your best approach with MIL is to upfront and say 'why did you feed DD chocolate?".

Is your partner as annoyed as you?

Sucking on a chocolate bar once isn't weaning

duh..really??
It was an example to get the OP to realise its not the end of the world.

My DH and his siblings were all on solids by 8 weeks in the 70's. 2 out of 3 of them have terrible gut problems now. I don't understand why people thought that giving a month old baby liquidised dinners was a good idea. It's awkward trying to avoid bad feeling but your wishes based on current evidence need to be followed.

An unweaned baby was given chocolate. What would have happened if the child had had an allergic reaction to one of the ingrediants? Cheap chocs nearly always contain egg, milk, and gluten.

My mum has been trying to feed my DD milky bar since 4 months. She keeps leaving a bar around her in the hope she'll pick it up and put it in her mouth

Stay strong! You're definitely not unreasonable!