Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Infant feeding

Get advice and support with infant feeding from other users here.

Original poster

Okay - so why should I wait any longer to start him on solids?

29 replies

DingDongDinosaurOnHigh · 16/12/2004 15:01

DS3 will be 20 weeks old on Monday. Up until one week ago he was exclusively breastfed. During the last week he has had about 12 ounces of formula, in addition to breast milk.

He is quite big (91st centile) and seems very discontented at the moment. He seems incapable of sleeping longer than two hours at the very most, whereas up until recently he was going in his cot at 8 p.m. and sleeping until 12 or even 1 a.m. Now I often cannot get him to go down in the evenings at all, and am breastfeeding him three or four times between 11.30 and 6 a.m. His daytime naps have become very patchy too (whereas we were previously in a routine of short nap in the morning, long nap after lunch, short nap in the late afternoon).

He hasn't had any bad reaction to his three bottles of formula (no rash, no vomiting, not too windy etc).

He is clearly very interested in the food we are eating - he sits at the table with us and watches us and licks his lips! He tried to grab a bit of banana from me yesterday, and lunchtime today tried to mug DS2 for a piece of toast.

DS1 and DS2 started on solids when they were 16 weeks with no discernible ill effects - DS2 was pretty porky, but then he was chubby before he started on solids so I don't know whether it made any difference. DS1 did have eczema but I think that was caused by formula (which I introduced much earlier with him) rather than by solids.

So what are the arguments in favour of leaving it any longer to start him on solids?

OP posts:
RudyDudy · 16/12/2004 15:05

DingDongetc - imho I think you would be able to start him on solids at 20 weeks with no ill effects and probably some positive ones as from what you've said he sounds ready! For one thing, ime it takes a while to build up to them having anything like a reasonable amount anyway and if you start on something like babyrice with formula then I don't think it can do any harm. The main arguments against are around their digestive organs and kidneys not being mature enough to handle it but personally I think as long as you are sensible about what you introduce and the rate at which you introduce it I am sure he will, like the others, be fine.

motherinfestivemood · 16/12/2004 15:07

The mugging does sound indicative, doesn't it.

motherinfestivemood · 16/12/2004 15:07

Solids are of course a bloody nuisance. Biggest reason for delaying them IMO.

RudyDudy · 16/12/2004 15:09

agreed - but less so than a baby who won't settle and wants feeding all night!

aloha · 16/12/2004 15:09

Personally, in your shoes, though I'm generally in favour of delayed weaning, I'd probably give him the banana. I think ds's first food was a choc chip muffin! Yikes. Only a few crumbs though (in my defence).

ReindeerNosebagAddiction · 16/12/2004 15:50

Dinosaur - can't imagine your ds being so big - he was just still so tiny when I last saw him at the City Lunch. You've obviously been doing a sterling job of the bf front!

Personally speaking (and I started solids with dd at 20 weeks - mainly for my own selfish reasons as I was going back to work shortly after) I do not see the point of making him and you miserable by the continued hunger/night wakings/constant feeding thing just for the sake of holding out for another 4 weeks. As long as you have no other concerns (re:allergies, etc.) and he seems up for it - which he obviously does, then I would go for it!

tiktok · 16/12/2004 16:04

The point about 6 mths for solids is that there is no evidence that most babies actually need them any sooner than this...before 15 weeks we have evidence they are actually harmful, and for some highly allergic babies, there are good reasons for delaying them, too. But it is a developmental stage, not a date in a calendar, and a 20 week old baby who seems to be at that develomental stage should be fine. Give him the banana when he seems to want it, and just go slowly and follow what he seems to want - no point in making work for yourself by zooming on to three meals a day. Let him share bits of toast.

Don't hold out hope that he will sleep better though - he may and may not and it may or may not have anything to do with solids

AussieSim · 16/12/2004 16:26

I started me DS on solids @ 4.5 months and initially he slept worse before he slept better. He developed eczema though (thanks DH!) and so I resolved to hold out till 6mths with my next one (expected July). At my first appt with the MW she said that there was some thinking that solids could be held off up until 12mths - shocked me and doesn't sit quite right with me, but I am not an expert. The MW was from the UK as well.

Cinderellascarrieg · 16/12/2004 16:30

I started ds on vegetable purees & the odd jar at 16 weeks. Like you Dinosaur I have a large baby (98th percentile) who'd started to wake in the night demanding a feed & was casting beady eyes at our food!

I know all the arguments against early weaning - but I was absolutely shattered from more or less continual bf'ing, & ds was quite clearly hungry. In the end it came down to instinct & common sense - & ds is now thriving on 3 meals a day & bf'ing at 20 weeks.

If it worked for your two older ones to start solids at 16 weeks, I'd say give it a go?

janeyjinglebops · 16/12/2004 16:57

I too had a big baby and started him on solids at 15 and half weeks. He was constantly hungry and fed for about 4 hours before he went to bed at night!

The first day the book said give him one spoonful of baby rice. He had 10! On day 2 he had 15 spoonfuls... Basically he hasn't stopped eating since. Not podgy or any allergies so seems OK with him.

I thought the 6 month weaning was for developing countries more due to poor water supplies re mixing formula and food???? Not sure where I heard that but it was definitey in the past year.

xmashampermunker · 16/12/2004 17:05

JJB, no, not at all. Six months is what the WHO have been saying for ten years, but it's only recently that the Government in this country has said it (largely because if they said six months to wean, they'd have to buck their ideas up regarding maternity leave!).

Babies' guts aren't more mature because they live in a developed country. And the recommendations do say breastmilk for six months, so the clean water thing isn't an issue.

janeyjinglebops · 16/12/2004 17:08

Must have been dreaming then. I don't think I could have coped with ds till 6 months as bf A LOT. DD would probably have coped but that was before the 6 month advice came in.

Cinderellascarrieg · 16/12/2004 17:09

That was another argument in favour of weaning - maternity leave. I'll be going back when he's just 6 months, & I didn't think he'd take kindly to a change of diet AND spending 4 days a week with a childminder, all hitting him all at once as it were...

merrykittymas · 16/12/2004 17:16

I was so indecisive about weaning DD so we started this week (22 weeks) so far she's had banana, baby rice and apple (not all at once lol) and she's loving it her little tongue is coming out anytime a spoon goes near her.

I'm going to take it really slow and just give her tastes until she's 6 months.

Most babies I know were weaned at 15-16 weeks and seem fine.

xmashampermunker · 16/12/2004 17:16

I went back part time when DS was six months and ten days old - it's only been in the last couple of weeks he's started eating anything like a noticeable quantity. He has adult food most of the time though (unless it's really unsuitable and we're out).

I really didn't want to put him onto solids before he was ready and at six months he really wasn't. I have eczema and hayfever, plus have had various things that suggest my immune system isn't all it could be, so didn't want to introduce solids early.

So for the first couple of months, I expressed heaps of milk for him to have while I was at work and took it slowly with the food. He's now very happy to sit in a highchair when we're out and eat adult food - he had chicken, bread, banana, cheese and cooked red onion the other day - all pieces of food he chewed and swallowed himself.

So I'm not convinced by the 'your baby will never eat lumps if you leave it' school of thought either! But just because this works for us, doesn't mean it would work for everyone. I was lucky I was able to express enough for him to have while I was away - and I wasn't back full time either.

xmashampermunker · 16/12/2004 17:17

Ooh, should say, DS is now 8.5 months old.

Original poster
DingDongDinosaurOnHigh · 16/12/2004 17:31

Oh oh oh, it's so difficult to decide what to do...

I quite like Tiktok's suggestion of letting him have little bits of real food without going full steam ahead to the three meals a day stage. However, as I am going back to work in mid-Feb (boo hoo) I will have to make some progress on the weaning front by then or the poor wean will starve (oh, and expect lots of feeble expressing questions from me shortly ).

OP posts:
xmashampermunker · 16/12/2004 17:36

Express a bit each day (or if you're like me, when you can be bothered...) - each day is better for building supply and having some in the freezer when you go back to work.

Are you going back full or part time? I still express when I'm at work and it's only now that what I can express is overtaking what he drinks while I'm away from him. Which is lovely - I'm planning on going to the cinema over Christmas - I've not felt that I could use the milk for 'frivolous' purposes before now!

Do try giving him bits of food - milk's still the most important part of his diet for the first year, but get him used to new tastes and textures.

aloha · 16/12/2004 17:39

He won't starve! He'll be fine. Honest. He didn't get to 90th centile plus by being rubbish at eating! I think the idea of just adding bits of banana and scraps of toast to his milk diet is a splendid one, and I very much hope to take that approach with my next one. Boo to baby rice and mush!

dinny · 16/12/2004 20:11

Hi, Dino, no advice really - except to say I am supposed to go back to work in March so can sympathise. Don't want to though - am seriously considering staying off and being totally skint. It's so hard - so wish the extended mat leave was in now!

Original poster
DingDongDinosaurOnHigh · 17/12/2004 09:47

Hi Dinny! No, I don't want to go back to work either, but as I am the sole earner I don't have a choice at all. Anyway, have decided to set myself a five year plan to requalify to do something else more interesting. So that should keep me busy .

OP posts:
dinny · 17/12/2004 20:53

Ooh, what are you requalifying as? I may be made redundant anyway - well, my bit of the BBC is being sold off . Hey, are you in London? Maybe we should attempt some meet-up before returning to work...? x

serenequeen · 17/12/2004 21:04

sorry off topic...

teehee, dino! i'm the main earner and am always saying that in 5 yrs, when i'm 40 etc etc i'm going to give up and do something else!

anyway, the start of the 5 yrs keeps on getting pushed further away...

hope you are better at the 5 yr planning than me!

dinny · 17/12/2004 21:09

SQ, have asked you a ques in Nurseries - does your ds still go to EP? Have you heard the rumours it's been sold?

xmashampermunker · 17/12/2004 23:17

Still off topic - my bit of the BBC is being sold off too - Dinny, what do you do?!

Swipe left for the next trending thread