Friend giving food to 14-week old, what should I say?

[Heeka]

I have a good friend, with a 14-week old BIG baby, who has started to give him baby rice and other solids as she feels that due to his size he needs more than just milk. She is breastfeeding plus giving extra bottles of formula as well.

She seems almost proud that he 'needs' early food.

I don't want to interfere, but when she talks to me about doing it, rather than being non-commital as I have done until now (she has been giving food for last two weeks), I would like to gently point out why it is perhaps not to her child's benefit.

I would like be able to do this by perhaps giving her a few facts rather than hearsay, but without being either pushy or know-it-all.

She has allergies to a variety of things herself, if this is relevant.

I know I'm going to get told that I should mind my own business and leave her to it, but when she is bringing up the subject herself I don't think it's wrong to give my opinion (ie. it's too early and not clever!) but I want to do it in the right way and with the right facts.

EdgarAllenSnow - "educated people question the guidelines and do further research into what is, in actual fact, probably on average better," - what on earth are you talking about?

Although I am pretty well-educated, doing research into something that is in no way my speciality would seem a bit silly; I'd far rather trust current guidelines based on research that experts have done.

And just because your mother weaned you at 12 weeks and you think you're ok, that hardly makes it sensible to go against the current research, does it?

I question "current health advice" to be honest - I work in the NHS. It is ADVICE, and people can choose to do things differently. My dd was not ready until 7 months old. Children are different and do not all fit into supoosed experts ideas of what should happen.

And interestingly, I was weaned at 12 weeks old and have no food allergies. my dd who as i said was weaned at 7 months, is allergic to dairy, red peppers, and a variety of food additives.

My DS2 is 14 weeks and for the past 14 weeks I have been bf virtually constantly as a result DH and I have had no relationship. I am exhausted as I have not had more than 2 hrs sleep at a time. I cannot do anything or go anywhere due to constant feeding. Initially DS2 was gaining a 1 lb a week but over the last couple of weeks he has not been gaining and started to fall off the 91st centile. This coincided with constant crying and a very unhappy baby. I finished my 50 oz supply of expressed milk as top ups and had no spare time to express anymore. Initially I was very reluctant to give formula as a top up but I gave in due to tiredness however DS2 refused formula.
My HV has been great and was making regular visits, this week she very nervously suggested I should wean! Which was exactly what my mother and grandmother advised. I am a doctor and followed the guidelines to the letter with DS1. However, DS2 is different to DS1 and like any mother I most certainly do not wish to harm my most precious baby but I have weaned much to my own shock. Since I started solids DS2 appears happy, content, more alert and playfull.
I am sharing this information nervously because I am embarrased and never thought I would ever do such a thing but I cannot deny the difference in my little one I think he was starving which surely can't be good!

8 years ago the guideline was 3 months and people believed the advice was right. i can assume that in a few years time that they will have changed again, maybe to 8 months and everyone will be swallowing all the drivel again. what has happened to good old fashioned mothers' instinct? your friend is obviously very aware of her baby's needs, so get off your moral high horse and start supporting her instead of questioning her parenting skills.

When DS1 (9.5) was a baby the guidelines said 13 weeks was the earliest age to wean...

When DS2 (7) was a baby the guidelines said 17 weeks was the earliest age to wean...

When DD (2) was a baby the HV suggested I try her with some solids at around 20 weeks, when I questioned her about this (due to the current 26 week recommendation) she said that as long as the baby had no wheat, dairy, eggs or meat products before 6 months, and they were over 17 weeks, it was fine to try them with some fruit and veg (although no citrus). There are other factors than age which indicate a baby's readyness for weaning including whether they can roll over or sit up and the amount of interest they show in your food.

With the DSs the recommendation on wheat, dairy, eggs and meat was also 6 months and I stuck to this. Although they were weaned at varying ages, it does not seem to have given them any allergies (although I know this is not the case in all children).

If it really worries you then perhaps next time she mentions it you could check to make sure she's not giving him any of the nasties? Other than that I'm not sure what you can do without sounding patronising. Also, IME, what you say may not make a difference to her actions anyway, she is proud of her LO weaning early and perhaps, like auntymel, he is not happy between feeds and really does need the extra. I have a friend whose LO was a 2 hourly feeder (formula too) and she started giving her baby rice at 6 weeks, I was but it wasn't my baby, I offered advice ("ooh, that's early" etc) but she carried on doing what she thought was best for her baby, isn't that what we all do?

i have read the reasearch. i am not impressed by it,

quite often here on mumsnet we question quidelines (co-sleeping particularly!) using our own brains to point out the flaws - you do not need to be a dietician to understand that a study that compares (eg) Group A - women who have intervention to encourage ebf to 6 months with Group B - without intervention has not in fact checked whether it is the exclusivity that caused the benefit to group A - or merely the uplift in breastfeeding simple. And, if the study is done in (say) Belarus, how applicable the result is to a genuine first world country with clean tap water and power that rarely cuts out. Peer-reviews are available online for most major current research and are indeed critical of these studies (that's what they do!). The evidence on allergies particularly is equivocal - though breastfeeding itself is agreed to be definitely helpful, weaning age is either strongly indicative, irrelevant or even counter-indicative depending which study you look at.

and like i said there is a current study being done to look back at 12 weeks as a guideline with a view to reducing allergies....as there was a spike in allegies when the 26 week guideline was introduced....(though possibly, allergies have been increasing...whilst the weaning age goes down, it could be for other reasons...) So possibly in the light of that - the weaning age could be revised again? (or more likely, more studies will be commissioned!)

although i don't think instinct applies as such - if a mother has baby that feeds non-stop and she finds baby rice helps - who are you to say she shouldn't do that?

one woman on a different forum i was on, in that situation, got out her bottles & steriliser again because of the yells 'oooh no rice''. What a triumph for BF it is when that happens!

and time and time again people will say formula = ok rice = bad though there's no evidence for that.

when ds (now 15) was born the guidance for starting solids was 12 weeks.. he is now strapping & healthy, with lots of strapping & healthy friends (who all presumably were weaned at the same time)

when dd (now nearly nine) was born, guidance for weaning was 16 weeks.. she is also healthy with healthy friends

who knows what evidence may come to light to inform future changes in guidance?! maybe it will turn out 26 weeks was not right either!

i would say nothing if i was you, your friend just sees things differently to you.

presumably she knows about the current advice on weaning and has chosen to ignore it? therefore she may well just think you are interfearing?

also.. government advice is often ignored on mass by people who distrust it, or have read the science behind it but are inconvinced..

MMR jabs for instance

or alcohol consumption when pregnant

BOth mine were on solids at 15 weeks, as per the advice of the HV back then (11 plus years ago).

I would just keep your mouth closed, unless she asks for your opinion.

Here here, hecklepeckle

Say bugger all - all babies are different. With my ds I was in the same position as auntymel, breastfeeding every 1.5 hours for 2 weeks until I was a depressed, miserable snappy sleep deprived zombie. As soon as he had a little rice he was more content and we were all happier - he really did seem to need it and 2 weeks of that is imho more than just a growth spurt. With dd1 I fully intended to wait till 6 months to introduce food as she wasn't such a big, fast growing or hungry baby. But at 17 weeks after she hadn;t had a poo for 2 weeks (!) as she was using up everything I fed her I started weaning. And lo, everything returned to normal and she started putting on weight again.

herlady - I don't understand your point about people ignoring advice en mass, both the examples you give are of people doing ill advised things surely?

Wow, I think this thread really shows how each individual baby is, and how 'mother knows best'(i hope in most cases). Ds1 i weaned at 24wk, he weighed about 15lb's...he took to solids really really well and IMO was very ready. Ds2 i've recently weaned, tried him at 24wks, weight was over 20lb's!! But he wasn't ready, was gagging and bringing all of his milk back up. So I left it til 26wks and just took it slowly, I don't think he was really ready until 27wks. It's amazing how much they develop over 1 wk!!

Sorry meant to add that i personally wouldn't say anything to your friend. There's lots of things i see/hear that i wouldn't do with my dc's but that is my choice.

The guidelines in the UK have not been 12 weeks or three months - despite what individual HVs might have told their mothers - for more than 30 years and even then it was 3-6 mths (I collect information to mothers and have 'vintage' leaflets )

EdgarAllenSnow - you are referring to the EAT study. There has been no spike in allergies since 26 weeks was introduced - or show me the research that says this. Hardly anyone obeys the new guidance of 26 weeks anyway. The Infant feeding survey 2005 showed only 1 per cent of babies had not had solids by 6 mths. I expect the next survey - due to be published 2012 - will show a slight rise but it won't be much. It takes ages for people to change behaviour like this - it happens gradually. Age of weaning has gone up, gradually, over the past 20 years and fewer babies are weaned at 3 mths than used to be the case.

A baby being given solids at 14 weeks is certainly not being well-fed, but while the majority of babies this happens to will not show signs of illness or malnourishment, there's plenty of good evidence to show that it's not a good idea. As regards what you say to her, as she is asking about it, tell her what the guidance is, and that it is based on good research about what we know is good nutrition for babies. Earlier guidance did not have the benefit of the research.

Thank you Tiktok and others; I'm unlikely to say much if anything but it's good to have proper info if I do choose to mention something.

Lots of 'well I gave my baby some rice at three days old and it hasn't done him any harm so you should shut up' stories are really not terribly helpful!