Nobody fed the baby.

[shaylla]

I need a bit of perspective from others point of view here please.

A 13 month old - given breakfast at 7.30, then instead of his normal lunch is only given half an eggs worth of scrambled egg at lunch time. No water or milk all day then till 5 when another adult returns home and finds out (and feeds baby immediately). The adult/s in charge of the baby all day 'didn't realise' ... ??

This is neglect yes?

How often do you eat between 7:30 and 5pm? I would just have lunch. A typical lunch for me would be one or two eggs and a slice of toast, so I'd assume that half an egg was about the right amount for a baby, although I would have included toast.

The dehydration worries me more than anything.

OP stated the baby had breakfast.

You can change your vote by clicking on the 'right' option

(I've done this before when I have not realised what BU was and assumed the opposite wrongly)

I'm a social worker in safeguarding. Context and a bit more detail is important here. Yes, this is not acceptable for a 13 month old to go 9 hours or so with very little food and no water, but equally if this was just an isolated incident and another adult came and promptly met the child's needs, then I would be less concerned, however it would need to be made clear this person could not care for the child alone again. What you're not telling us is whether this is a regular occurrence or whether this person is the child's main carer as that would be significantly concerning.

Agree Milk is the main source of food until 12 months for my little one it was the main until 15 months she nibbled more than ate full meals and had her milk and snack fruit vet rice cakes and the baby snacks. The risk is dehydration and the food they have quoted is not enough calories the lady saying it is enough is saying hers is breastfeed as well so that would be enough wouldn't it but this child had no milk or fluids.

Is there a reason the baby's parents didn't tell the person/people watching the baby about the baby's routine? Or was the one not feeding the baby one of the parents? There isn't enough information here for me to say if this was neglect by the minder or by the parents.

That is shocking neglect for fluids especially.
I hope you report this as it’s comply unacceptable.
You can guarantee the adults in charge ate and drank.

There's no way on earth that I would leave a child with those adults again. It is very much neglect and without excuse, sorry.

This is absolutely ridiculous. Poor baby.

It's not happened before.
Baby is happy and very healthy.

Baby had porridge and milk for brek.
Baby was well fed as soon as the mum came home.

I'm hoping it was a one off! It's amazing to me that anyone could get through a day not being aware of a baby's needs even if there's other adults around.

I just wanted some perspective on how angry to be. I'm bemused by it. So is the mum. Within the knowledge that obviously not all details are know to everyone posting - this has helped.

You can change it to YANBU.

That's bloody shocking, my child would never be alone with any of those people again. Of course it's neglectful. Id be hungry and thirsty with that small amount never mind a growing baby.

Yeah I would agree with this. If the child has had a good breakfast and something to drink at breakfast, something to eat at dinner time and then in the hubub of the day it's not been noticed that no one has put a sippy cup of water out for the baby but the baby is otherwise not in distress (a bit grumpy at tea time is most 13mo on a normal day!) then it's 'not great but no harm done' for me.

Sounds like they've had a good feed at tea time and have otherwise been changed and looked after. In the grand scheme of things it's not Romanian orphanages level of neglect- its still a bit shit but not going to cause any lasting harm.

I bet it turns out the baby has had a drink at some point - mine were excellent at finding half full sippy cups in random places they had buried them days earlier and taking a manky swig.

really ffs, do they normally eat? Sometimes my baby won’t eat a thing after being ill or a few days after. Hate people, everyone just jumping to the worst with the tiniest details

@Iudncuewbccgrcb i'm swinging between feeling exactly like this and wanting to go and punch someone.

If I wasn't there, she'd usually refuse fluids bar an occasional sip of water, and then catch up by feeding all night. I'm also curious as to how many naps the baby has. Many babies (not mine but other lucky people) go up to 12 hours at night without a drink at that age, because they are sleeping and don't need it. She might well have been asleep for 3 or more hours of the day.

Not a good day but hopefully a rare one. Usual carer should leave a schedule with the baby - times and quantities for meals, snacks, drinks, nappy changes, naps.

I think it matters what the child was offered as well as what they actually ate? Based on the half a scrambled egg my instinct is that you're describing what was actually consumed? There were definitely days my DS ate almost nothing but I was regularly offering him things. I was told by HCPs that as long as he was well in himself, having wet nappies and playing etc. that his appetite would change day to day and just to follow his lead, offer him a variety of food and trust that he'd eat when hungry.

In fact around that age I felt like I was spending my entire days making food except half of the days it was all going in the bin and other half he was like a bottomless pit.

The liquid is more concerning but again even now sometimes my DS at 2 years old drinks very little and other days drinks a lot. When I try to force it it becomes a power struggle, he completely refuses to drink and it makes it worse. He still has wet nappies and is happy and alert so he's clearly getting enough water overall but his water consumption is very inconsistent.

I can't remember the ages but don't most children stop having daytime bottles of formula/milk at 12 months old? I feel like my health visitor was trying to get us to stop really quite early. We continued giving milk anyway, but I was under the impression that at 13 months old they wouldn't be drinking bottles of milk regularly throughout the day anyway. I may be remembering the ages wrong though.

I don't know. I definitely see the "of course it's neglect" and I'm not trying to excuse it. It's just that there's not much detail given and I'm confused because I'd expect that the child would be crying if hungry or thirsty.

I think there is a massive difference between a child who is crying in hunger and being ignored vs a child who is busy playing and throws their toast on the floor and doesn't want anything for a day.

In the hubbub of the day forgetting to meet the baby's basic needs? What on earth could be happening in the house that would make someone who's supposed to be caring for an infant just forget to even give them a sip of water. It's crap and you shouldn't minimise it.

No drink all day? Not even water? Or milk?

Has the kid come to any harm?

Did the adults go without any drink for the duration out of interest?

Not acceptable, but if this person wasn't familiar with the baby were they given a schedule or routine at all? At least told when the baby usually has bottles?

In the hubbub of the day forgetting to meet the baby's basic needs? What on earth could be happening in the house that would make someone who's supposed to be caring for an infant just forget to even give them a sip of water. It's crap and you shouldn't minimise it.

Well this is it.
A schedule was given. KNOWN by 2 of the adults.
As far as i know the baby refused a spoon of something he doesn't normally eat (why did they offer it?!?) so was offered a scrambled egg. He ate half of it (not that keen on egg) then nothing else was offered!
This info was admitted freely.

It's just ... baffling. A fuck up. Or actual neglect?