to think too many HV are pussyfooting around the "no solids before 6mos" guidelines

[BouncingTurtle]

because so many mums I know are still weaning their babies way before this?
The research backing up why we should wait until 6months has been around a while, the guidelines have been in place for several years, early weaning has only been around since the early part of the last century, co-incidentally about the same time that commercial baby foods and formula became readily available to the masses.

Is it the guilt thing? My mum weaned me at 6mo and I have IBS and other gastro-intestinal complaints which have been linked to early weaning. My mum doesn't feel guilty about weaning me early - and why should she? She was only doing what she was advised to do at the time and there wasn't the research available then that we have today!

Yet HVs are still failing to support mums in waiting til 6months and still hauling out the same old chestnuts about 4mo growth spurt being taken as readiness for solids and ignoring the fact that BM & FM are more nutritionally complete and calorific than baby rice and pureed carrot? They don't seem to tell mums why they should wait.

"there is no maximum amount of formula allowed"

I didn't know that (not that I went by the amounts on the tin, simply that I increased the feeds gradually in response to the baby's needs up to the point where he was taking 9 ozs at every feed, at which time the HV recommended weaning). Mind you, how does feeding on demand equate to trying to get a baby to cut out feeding through the night? My first baby was fed on a four-hourly schedule (7am-11am-3pm-7pm-3am) and he cut out the 3am feed at six weeks and the 11pm feed at 11 weeks and I started weaning him at 13 weeks. I've just had my second baby five weeks ago and he cut out the 3am feed last week. Surely adding more feeds into the day runs counter to trying to get the baby to cut feeds out?

I've never fed on demand, mostly because it seemed to me to be something that was more compatible with breastfeeding and also because it appeared to be inconsitent with getting the baby into a routine - I'm happy to be corrected by anyone who has experience to the contrary as my opinions are based solely on my own experience.

I am sure I read somewhere that there was an era of starting to wean at about 4 weeks (giving fruit juices and water etc). I don't think the babies all died from it. Otherwise we wouldn't be here now.
But I do think people forget or don't take in that whatever advice is given always contains a component of 'depends on the individual baby.

The advice that I was given to early wean was also because of reflux.
In my case it definately coincided with an improvement in her but reflux (of her variety) improves with age anyway

I weaned both of mine at around five months, but didn't rush things like grain (pasta). Also there are no food-related allergies in either of our families, which in some cases would impact on when a baby is weaned, I would imagine.

Was at a breast feeding support group yesterday and the HV was speaking to mums about signing up for the Weaning Group. One mum asked at what age of their babies ought they start to attend the weaning group. HV said 12 weeks!

Now I an intrigued and may just pop along and listen to hear what is actually said. I should hope it is to wait but from previous convos at the same group, I can only see that she will tweak the guidelines to suit her opinion.

I can see that a HV saying to a mum who's never demand fed because she doesn't understand the rationale for it, "respond to your baby's needs with extra milk/extra feeds on an instinctive and ad hoc basis in the run up to weaning", isn't really going to cut much ice. Lots of mums in the UK will have no truck with giving increased numbers of milk feeds -they see it as a backward step when they're thundering down the road to the end of babyhood. They're also culturally attuned to getting babies into rigid feeding routines based around family meals as quickly as possible . . HV's can't move mountains - they've got to work with the culture they're in, and our whole culture doesn't support baby-centred weaning practices.

My third baby was massive - not especially big at birth (9lbs 3oz) but then went up through two centiles over the first few months on breastmilk alone. In the run up to beginning weaning at 6 months he fed loads and loads and loads - literally half hourly on some days. As an older mum and an experienced, relaxed breastfeeder I had the confidence to go with it but if I'd been younger or he'd been my first child, he would have been on solids much earlier. Frequent feeding just isn't tolerated in our society - even though it's completely normal baby behaviour it's seen as something pathological that needs to be dealt with - either by rushing a baby onto solids, giving the baby a dummy, letting it cry it out or switching from bf to ff in an attempt to stretch out the feeds.

Good points, bangbang.

Shame that women don't allow themselves to enjoy the moments of their motherhood and their baby's babyhood more and treat 12 months as some goal on which to give themselves a score.

For me reaching 12 months with out injuring or killing my dd was all the milestone I was happy to fulfill.

You are all going to shoot me down right about now.

dd1 (now 10) was on solids at 10 weeks old as she was having a 9oz bottle of hungrier baby milk every 2 hours and i this what i was advised by hv and gp.

dd2 (now 4) was 12 weeks when solids were introduced. I bf for 5 weeks constantly as she wasn't satisfied and then put on ff which again just wasn't enough so after consulations with hv, gp and a dietician they all advised that solids is what was needed.

both dd's are healthy and very good eaters, i am now pg with number 3 and i hope to bf for as long as possible but i would never rule out early weaning if my baby needed it.

Breast feeding my DD never got beyond 2 hourly feeds. I was exhausted but kept it up for near on 5 months, and then I couldn't physically cope anymore.

HV actually told me to introduce a bottle and GP (female) implied the same.

GP had 3 kids and said that with her 3rd she had to wean early because of her tummy problems, like my DD>

I now feel guilty for demand feeding as I wonder whether I actually caused or at least exaggerated her tummy issues.

I think I took the "on demand" bit a little too literally. My DD would feed for hours and scream and scream if I tried to pull away. In hindsight, I wonder whether I read her wrong - maybe she needed a dummy and i just fed the poor mite as it was the only way to stop her crying. Next time round,I will try other options.

You can call me titty if you like kiskidee

"For me reaching 12 months with out injuring or killing my dd was all the milestone I was happy to fulfill."

LOL

When I think of my slapdash ways as a parent I often look at my three and marvel at the fact that I've managed to get them to this point without major mishap (fingers, toes etc crossed that it may long continue this way).

pamelat - I'm sure your breastfeeding didn't damage your child in any way at all.

If you'd seen an experienced lactation consultant they would have gone through all the possibilities as to why feeding was so difficult for you and your baby. There can be lots of quite subtle, complex reasons why this can be the case - but you need an expert to advise. HV's and GP's are not always the best people to ask about breastfeeding. I know it seems odd but it's true.

DS2 is 20 weeks, he is so obviously not ready for solid food, even at around 18lbs (he hasn't been weighed for a couple of weeks).

He loves calpol, as he is teething he has had some quite a few times and he rolls it around in his mouth, he has lost his tongue reflex.

This is a sign of readiness, however, he has none of the other signs. He cannot yet sit unaided, he cannot grasp food, if he does get hold of something, yes, it goes to his mouth, but to suck, because that is what babies his age do. But he cannot chew.

He also still wakes in the night, because babies his age do.

If peopel were taught the signs of readiness, which although can include waking in the night, also include, being able to sit unaided, being physically able to pick up food, put it in their mouth and chew and swallow it, then we wouldn't have anywhere near as many problems with early weaning.

We shoudl abolish all purees completely, and advocate BLW, so babies can decide for themselves, then if you wanted to sit your baby in a highchair at 17 weeks with some steamed carrot, it wouldn't be an issue, because they wouldn't eat it if they weren't ready.

FWIW, I hae great HVs, they are all for EX BF/BLW/Looking at the baby rather than the weight etc.

BT - do you think 6 months counts as early weaning? Did you mean 6 months in your OP?

My DS was doing ALL of the things VS mentions at 14 weeks. I tried him with something, and he chewed and swallowed. And when he was weaned he wasn't really interested in purees as such, he liked lumps I was very shocked.

Does this mean he should have been weaned at 14 weeks?

Jcscot for a lot a people getting a baby into a routine isn't the ultimate goal. Demand feeding isn't incompatible with bottle feeding and is to be encouraged. Bottle fed babies should be allowed to regulate their own appetites as well as bfed ones. Also, demand feeding doesn't necessarily mean night feeding, in fact demand feeding in the day might mean that LO is getting enough milk to get them through the night.

DD was demand bfed and she was going 11 til 5am at 8 weeks.

He was sitting up unaided, at 14 weeks?

IMO, there are a lot of things that HV don't explain and very often it's because they don't know themselves.

I have only met 1 hv (yes, 1 out of the 8 I know!) who seems to know all the things I expect hv to know. Weaning is just one such example. When I asked one of the hv why the guidelines say 6 months, she replied, "because breast is best for the first 6 months."

Yes, but why? Don't worry, I did my own research to find the answers to my questions!

jscot, in answer to your question:

feeding on demand does not lend itself to a routine, but is far better, IMO and IME for the baby.

why would your first aim be to cut out feeds at a young age?

if babies can feed as and when they want, they tend to find their own routine, the problem then is if that routine is not the one the parents were hoping for!

some babies sleep through sooner than others.. both of mine were formula fed and slept through early on.. DD dropped her 11pm feed at 3 weeks old, but still had 1 - 2 feeds in the night for another few weeks.

she was satisfied on a small amount anyway.

some babies are simply hungrier than others

the goal of sleeping through is one we all strive for, but at what cost?

lots of grown ups wake in the night thirsty..why shouldn;t babies!?

i don;t undersand the hurry to get babies in a routine.. once they have a cold or cut a tooth or have growth spurt it goes out of the window anyway

some babies naturally fall into a lovely settled routine. some won;t however hard you try!

i have days when i am not that hungry, and don;t want breakfast, and days where i have 3 big meals , snacks and extra drinks!! babies do that too.

also feeding a baby, whether breast or bottle, is not jsut about filling their tummies , but having time to sit, look at, bond with and have some quiet nurturing time with your baby

What happened to common sense?

All babies are different. Some are not ready for solids until after 6 months, some will be ready before. Why the fuss?

DD was sitting alone at 20/21 weeks. I started weaning at about 23 weeks. She had lost tongue thrust, could sit well alone and was grabbing for our food etc. She was having 3 meals a day (very small ones!) within a week.

I think she was ready. She still eats very well now. If I hadn't thought she was ready, and still seemed to be thriving past 26 weeks, I would have carried on exclusive BF until later.

Why can't we let the little mites develop at the pace that's right for them as individuals, rather than forcing them to do things they're not ready for, or withholding things that they really want?

With DD, I was young and depressed thought had to do what HV said, she first told me at 3 weeks to try her on a bottle despite the fact I was BFing no probs. Then she told me to start weaning at 12 weeks I did not having a clue what to do and gave her 3 meals a day but she wouldn't take hardly any milk breast or bottle. Then when normal HV was away DD was about 15 weeks, the relief one was horrified and told me I had probably done some damage to DD's stomach! Told her that the HV told me to do it and she refused to believe me. DD is 8 and fine but I followed instinct with DS he was mix fed until 6 1/2 months he was big( top of top centile) but completely satisfied with milk.
I guess the point is HV's word isn't gospel.

"...also feeding a baby, whether breast or bottle, is not jsut about filling their tummies , but having time to sit, look at, bond with and have some quiet nurturing time with your baby..."

Absolutely!

I have to admit that both my sons fell into a routine 4-hour schedule while still in hospital (I was in for a week with both of them) and all I did was adjust the timings to suit me. Colds, growth spurts and teething etc have never knocked my eldest son out of his routine - he seems to shrug such things off. Obviously it's too soon to tell whether the same will be true of my second son.

I suppose that I'm a little old-fashioned - a routine suits me (and appears to suit my sons) and allows me to be organised and efficient and enjoy being a Mum. I'm not rigid about it, as there has to be some flexibility, but it does allow me to plan and run my day and house in a reasonable manner. I get time to spend with my oldest son just on his own without the baby impinging on that and I get time with the baby without my oldest boy trying to grab my attention because he gets plenty of that at other times.

On the other hand, my sister-in-law was anti-routine and did all the things mentioned here - baby-led weaning, prolonged breastfeeding etc (she breastfed her children up to four years old) and they are healthy and happy children. I suppose my point is that we do what suits us and what we think is best and that the children come out pretty much the same in the end, no matter the school of thought to which one subscribes.

nah titty, I like calling you 'bangbang'.