To think giving babies solids under six months is not the essence of evil

[roseability]

Surely this is a worldwide recommendation (therefore a recommendation and not a set rule for all babies)

If we are talking about what is natural, wouldn't a mother have waited until baby was showing signs e.g. reaching for food, not satisfied on breastmilk/formula alone and then given the baby mushed up food from her own mouth? Not suggesting we should do this but the baby led weaning is surely an idea that can be adapted into the whole weaning process rather than an absolute rule?

I appreciate the idea behind avoiding allergies. However if you have no family history and you are avoiding wheat/dairy etc then what is wrong with a bit of baby rice and fruit/veg?

Is this recommendation more to stop babies under six months getting inappropiate foods? To avoid people mashing up highly inappropiate things and giving it to their babies?

Co sleeping is now challenged by FSIDS but many, many mothers do it. Breastfeeding is promoted as best but many mothers FF because it suits them and their babies best. Has this become yet another rule to which if you don't abide you are somehow less of a mother?

My own story - My DS was exclusively breastfed until 4.5 months. His weight wasn't in the right percentile and he was hungry (started waking a lot at night, reaching for food). My HV suggested starting solids. He had only baby rice and fruit/veg until six months. I never force fed him (he opened his mouth like a bird for it and then just stopped when he had had enough) and gave him lumps/chunks as soon as he was able. I loved cooking for him and he had a whole range of home cooked food. He is now 3.5 without any allergies and a great eater.

Of course some babies getting solids under six months will get allergies but I just feel this is putting pressure on mothers and stoppping them going by their babies' signs.

I know I am going to get slated but I am genuinely interested in mumsnet's opinion on this. Do I feel guilty for breaking the rules - of course! However I am worried to do things any differently with number 2 as DS is such a great eater!

Thanks carocaro for your insight. I will try and get a grip and take a good look at myself. I've called my mother and told her I don't blame her any more for my 'issues' around food. Still she taught me to spell and punctuate correctly - so, you know, swings and roundabouts.

:) hilarious!

Of course babies can tell us things, they just can't use words. I plan to wean between 4 and 6 months because my baby is showing all the signs of wanting food at 3 1/2 months. Interesting recent news on BBC re-opens this. I always think about what we would naturally and instinctively do before we had scientific research - not that science isn't great and made us the humans that we are - but because in some things relating to development there are strong instinctive cues and that is how humans have survived this far.

HV recommended solids for DD at 19 weeks as she was hungry all the time. We fed her baby rice and fruit and vegetable purees and she was a much more content child from then onwards.

Its not the essense of evil, but its a choice you make as a parent weighing up risks and benefits.

I had no issues until my 20s, now suffer badly from IBS, I blame my parents for early weaning at 12 weeks (only baby rice though).

If a baby is hungry then give more milk! Ok to wean 2-3 weeks early maybe but weaning at 16 weeks is taking a big chance with your child's future health. Why take the chance?

Ah yes, when evolution made humans, it was put in the manual that all babies are ready for food at 6 months, go through puberty at 13 etc

Or maybe when a baby reaches for food and is capable of eating, he is ready for food? My DS CAN FEED HIMSELF and is not yet six months. I started my periods when I was 10, as did my mum. I walked when I was 8 months old. My dad walked at 7 months.

YANBU

If a baby is hungry give more milk?

So why wean at six months? Why are we all not still breastfed? Because at some point, dependant on the child, not the date, a human needs more than milk.

I hate baby rice. Bleurgh. And rusks, who thought they were a sensible weaning food? I'M not allowed biccies for breakfast.

My kids were lateish weaners - all 3 were 2 weeks post dates born, and biggish babies, all were sitting unsupported by 4 months and early walkers - but DS1 wasn't on 3 meals a day until after a year (and still a chunk!), DD was probably 7 months before we got properly into it. DS2 was BLW between 5 and 6 months in that he ate what he could grab. Abd the demanding little person has been on about 14 meals a day since then, the beast.

They DO all mature at different rates, hence IMO spoons should be kept out of the equation except as play things, and they should be allowed to feed themselves. If they can get it in their mouth, chew and swallow it, then they were probably ready to eat it.

Disclaimer: This does not include small pieces of lego and or beads, these are not a food group.